Tip of the iceberg. See, for instance, this 2009 Deadspin list of Sterling lowlights featuring multiple allegations of racism, sexual harassment, and egregious skinflintery. The man’s defining characteristic is shamelessness, so much so that I’m surprised that he questioned the accuracy of that recording of him rambling about black fans at Clippers games. He’s 80 years old, financially invulnerable, is looking potentially at a billion-dollar profit if he sells the team, and seems to all appearances to relish being a boor. Why not own it at this point and laugh in the public’s face? “The Magic Christian” is long overdue for a sequel anyway.

All of which is to say, what does Costas think the media can or should do beyond simply reporting this out to humiliate this guy into liquidating his showcase property? Why, for that matter, does he want the media actively trying to help the NBA out of its PR clusterfark in the first place? Let the commissioner and owners deal with it. There’s little they can do under league rules to take control of the team unless it’s in financial distress, but presumably a lucrative enough offer will ease Sterling out the door. (We’ll call the difference between the team’s appraisal value and the sales price in this case the “racism premium.”) Having the owners demand that he sell might be the only form of peer pressure on him that works; the social circles he moves in might have looked the other way at his previous misdeeds but they can’t look the other way at this. The only other obvious solution is for the Clippers to go on strike (preferably next year instead of right now, in the middle of the playoffs, for the fans’ sake). That would force Sterling either to sell or to replace them with a bunch of scrubs who would be roundly destroyed by every team they play … thereby making them exactly like most of the Clippers teams that have played for Sterling since he bought the team in the early 80s.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

I’m speaking only in terms of philosophy, though. Practically, Sterling will be forced to sell/relinquish control. Doc Rivers is already publicly against him, and a team needs a coach more than it needs an owner (except for when paychecks need to be signed, of course).

Golly, I hope this means we’ll be treated to another Serious Conversation by Costas during Sunday Night Football next season! Cause lord knows, I’ve been on pins and needles waiting for him to denounce the remarks. /

What Sterling said was deplorable, but these public shaming campaigns for thought crimes are a far more worrisome trend.

Why does the news media have to be a party to this controversy? I thought their job was to report what’s happening, not be a party to it. Sterling should turn over control of the team to his wife, who apparently has more sense at this point than he does.

Why does the news media have to be a party to this controversy? I thought their job was to report what’s happening, not be a party to it. Sterling should turn over control of the team to his wife, who apparently has more sense at this point than he does.

In the past, I would have been all for ousting Sterling; not for any of his personal stances, but because he was a lousy owner who produced a horrible product. But the Clippers are finally ascendant. Hardly seems like the time to force him out, so it might be a perfect time for him to sell.

Good Solid B-Plus on April 28, 2014 at 6:01 PM

Because this is a PR nightmare for the NBA and it’ll get exponentially worse if Sterling still has control over the Clippers by the start of next season.

Right now, Silver is telling players and sponsors “Don’t worry, I get this, carry on”. They’re giving him time. So he’ll have to do something with that time – convince Sterling to step away.

Why does the news media have to be a party to this controversy? I thought their job was to report what’s happening, not be a party to it. Sterling should turn over control of the team to his wife, who apparently has more sense at this point than he does.

oldennis on April 28, 2014 at 6:17 PM

They ceased to see that as their job a long time ago. Now, they’re in the business of pushing agendas, so this is right in their wheelhouse.

Donald Sterling has the mother of all PR problems that will resolve itself without Bob Costas – one way or the other. My question is, when did the media switch from being the mouth piece of political correctness to the enforcement arm? Eh, Bobby Short Pants? Any answers?

Because this is a PR nightmare for the NBA and it’ll get exponentially worse if Sterling still has control over the Clippers by the start of next season.

Right now, Silver is telling players and sponsors “Don’t worry, I get this, carry on”. They’re giving him time. So he’ll have to do something with that time – convince Sterling to step away.

joana on April 28, 2014 at 6:31 PM

So let the NBA handle that. I’m saying why should it be a goal for your average fan, or for people who don’t care about the NBA at all.

Anyway, do they really want to set a precedent that owners can be forcibly ousted if they say anything a bit too touchy? I remember some people got mad because of Dan Gilbert’s famous “comic sans” open letter about LeBron. Should that be grounds for dismissal by Lord Silver?

And God forbid, what about Mark Cuban? I can’t imagine him existing in a world where he might get canned by the league for saying something controversial.

I don’t know how racist Sterling actually is, but I do know that his remarks were taken out of context, that Stiviano got a sizeable amount of money out of him, and that she was recording their private conversations.

I don’t know how racist Sterling actually is, but I do know that his remarks were taken out of context, that Stiviano got a sizeable amount of money out of him, and that she was recording their private conversations.

oldennis on April 28, 2014 at 6:38 PM

Reminds me of the Mel Gibson voicemails.

Mel said a lot of terrible stuff, and I don’t think it was right, but Oksana was also a conniver who set a trap for him.

So let the NBA handle that. I’m saying why should it be a goal for your average fan, or for people who don’t care about the NBA at all.
Good Solid B-Plus on April 28, 2014 at 6:36 PM

I don’t know – I can’t even thing of why would you wonder about that yourself. Then again, you seem to have a tendency to say the most bizarre things for no apparent reason.

For the record, I was replying to your question, and I quote ipsis verbis: Why should making him sell the team be a goal, though? I explained why: it’s a PR nightmare for the NBA that affects the league’s value – which should be concerning to any fan as well.

Anyway, do they really want to set a precedent that owners can be forcibly ousted if they say anything a bit too touchy? I remember some people got mad because of Dan Gilbert’s famous “comic sans” open letter about LeBron. Should that be grounds for dismissal by Lord Silver?

And God forbid, what about Mark Cuban? I can’t imagine him existing in a world where he might get canned by the league for saying something controversial.

Good Solid B-Plus on April 28, 2014 at 6:36 PM

You have no idea what you’re talking about. You need to stop being so dramatic and emotional; nobody is going to “forcibly oust” anyone. The NBA is a joint-venture, the by-laws don’t allow them to kick out a partner because of this kind of stuff. Silver will talk him into selling, possibly using some though love. But it’s a matter of persuasion; it’s not like the NBA will sue Sterling to force him to sell the team. Grown ups will talk and sort out a negotiated exit, don’t worry.

Don’t care if Sterling is a racist OR a Democrat. Both positions are still legal (and in my view being a Democrat is much more destructive to the unity and future of this nation than being a racist.)

I’m not even going to denounce racist thought and speech, because its just one of many poorly thought-out and emotional viewpoints people hold.

There are ACTIONS I will object to and fight against, but holding opinions is still a sacred freedom to a constitutionalist.

The longer we buy into this ridiculous outrageous outrage-y outrage over white guys saying racial things, or straight guys saying homo things, or Christians saying Christian things, the tighter we voluntarily pull that rope around our own necks, the rope that some famous Commie talked about one time.

Just stop it. Stop agreeing how awful terrible horrifying it is that Bundy/Sterling/Zimmerman/Eich said/did/thought such and such.

STOP THE DENOUNCING. The only rational response for a constitutionalist is “Yeah, maybe he’s an idiot. So?”

And now the poor guy’s girlfriend (undoubtedly ex-girlfriend now) is on tape cajoling him into revealing his racism. Man, what a winding road she led him down to get all of that out. She was like a sexy nanny playing “pin the fried chicken on the Sambo.” She blindfolded him and spun him around until he was just blathering all sorts of incoherent racist sound bites that had the news media peeing themselves with glee. — Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

No one is trying to censor the speech of Sterling or Bundy. They have an absolute right to speak. They do not, however, have a right to escape any consequences of their speech.

I may not like what you say, but will fight to the death to defend your right to say it. At the same time, I will not fight for you to be completely and utterly free of any consequences that may befall you.

There is no ‘right’ not to be offended, but there is also no ‘right’ to suffer any consequences resulting from your right to speak.

Sterling, for all the good he has done through charity work for minorities, is a racist dinosaur…

…and He has ever right to voice his opinion…

…and people have every right to choose to ‘punish’ him for that opinion by NOT buying tickets, by NOT going to games, to NOT buy merchandise…to NOT watch them on TV

….but (IMO) they do not have the right or authority to force him to give up or be stripped of his business…people can choose not to give him their business but not ‘take’ his business (unless there is some clause in the group of owners group).

I heard someone say he is running his team like a ‘plantation’. What B$! No one is being held in slavery to work against their will! They are being paid millions to play a game and can walk anytime they want.

I find what he said to be despicable, racist, foul, and wrong…but people need to rein in the vigilante attitude & stop over-blowing this (comparing his remarks to running a plantation). Hit him where it hurts – his wallet…and pity / pray for the man.

For the record, I was replying to your question, and I quote ipsis verbis: Why should making him sell the team be a goal, though? I explained why: it’s a PR nightmare for the NBA that affects the league’s value – which should be concerning to any fan as well.

Since when the hell do fans care about the league’s bottom line? I mean, I don’t want the league to go bankrupt, and I don’t want to precipitate another lockout. Beyond that, I give absolutely zero ****s if individual teams are profitable. I could care less if the NBA has a PR problem from this. I don’t watch NBA games to hear garbage PC claptrap, I watch them to see the best players in the world play at the highest level, which happens whether or not Sterling talks about black people.

You have no idea what you’re talking about. You need to stop being so dramatic and emotional; nobody is going to “forcibly oust” anyone. The NBA is a joint-venture, the by-laws don’t allow them to kick out a partner because of this kind of stuff. Silver will talk him into selling, possibly using some though love. But it’s a matter of persuasion; it’s not like the NBA will sue Sterling to force him to sell the team. Grown ups will talk and sort out a negotiated exit, don’t worry.

joana on April 28, 2014 at 7:47 PM

So as long as a lawsuit isn’t filed, it isn’t coercion? That’s ridiculous.

“Tough love”? LMAO. Have you *ever* followed the NBA? Do you know Sterling’s history? The league has known for decades that he’s a jerk and a racist. He’s a terrible owner, but selling should be his decision.

If he doesn’t want to sell and the commisioner forces him, then yes, that’s “forcibly ousting.” Not that I’ll shed any tears for him, as he’ll make a ton by selling to team. But it’s still a horrible precedent.

You clearly know absolutely nothing about the history of professional sports in this country. Especially in the NBA, the realm of Tim Donaghy, frozen envelopes and the “retirement” of MJ.

Don’t even think of trying to credibly respond to this, as I’ve used variations of this same argument in court, and never lost. In my cases, it had nothing to do with politics, however. And since my argument has held up in court proving that I proved my point without defending the accused party, you’re going to have a wonderful time refuting it.

Being a Registered voter identifying oneself as affiliated with a particular political party is absolutely no proof that said person actually voted for that party’s candidate, as the ballot is secret.

On the other hand, donating to candidates of a certain political party, as well as donating to, and then being recognized publicly for doing so, causes favored by that same other political party, is admissible in court as evidence that said person in question favored one side over the other.

A couple of things: in both cases, we have surreptitiously recorded remarks used to “out” someone. No one cares about privacy anymore? I guess we only worry about privacy if it’s a Republican admin snooping on cell phone calls or Obama making anti-Semetic remarks at a fund raiser.

It’s pretty obvious Stiviano is a gold-digging whore. She probably did embezzle all that money and taped Sterling for insurance if she got caught.

Lastly, do I need to say Sterling is a thoroughly odious man, a perfect example of a Democrat?

If they kick Sterling out of the league for what he said in private then they ought to be kicking the PLAYERS out of the league for what they say in private (and in public) … Players should be held to the same ‘moral’ standards… even higher standards if you ask me. Not too many people know who Sterling is… but everyone knows (and looks up to) the players. This is absolutely absurd… Kick EVERY player out who uses the N-word.

I heard the WHOLE tape and Sterling just called them ‘blacks’ and just said, “Honey, don’t post pictures, or come to my games with a black stud, it makes me look bad”.

“No one is trying to censor the speech of Sterling or Bundy. They have an absolute right to speak. They do not, however, have a right to escape any consequences of their speech.

I may not like what you say, but will fight to the death to defend your right to say it. At the same time, I will not fight for you to be completely and utterly free of any consequences that may befall you.

There is no ‘right’ not to be offended, but there is also no ‘right’ to suffer any consequences resulting from your right to speak.

Constitutionalists know that all rights come with responsibilities.”

Depends on what these ‘consequences’ are.How far reaching are they, and who decides?